New Bedford fishermen fly many flags. There is the American flag; the skull and crossbones flag. There are flags expressing resistance to offshore wind development. And there are many — many — flags for former President Donald Trump. 

But one flag is rarely hoisted on the New Bedford waterfront.

“I have yet to see a Harris-Walz flag on a fishing vessel,” said Drew Minkiewicz, an attorney representing the industry’s Sustainable Scalloping Fund. 

The South Coast already has the densest concentration of Trump supporters in an otherwise deep blue state. But if a pollster were to survey a specific two-mile stretch of paved riverbank — the Port of New Bedford — they would find an especially vivid shade of red. Among New Bedford fishermen and fleet owners interviewed by The Light, there are three types of voters: those who strongly favor Trump; those who are skeptical but reluctantly favor Trump; and those who didn’t want to share their opinion. 

“I can tell you point-blank who I’m voting for: Donald Trump,” said Tony Alvernaz, a New Bedford fisherman who now owns a small fleet of scallop vessels. “The Democratic Party is not the fisherman’s friend. It used to be. But it by no means is anymore.” 

The vast support for Trump among fishermen boils down to a few main points, some specific to the fishing industry, some not. Trump has said that he would overturn the ban on commercial fishing in Marine National Monuments, which was first enacted by the Obama administration, repealed by Trump and then re-established under President Joe Biden. There are frustrations with immigration policy and with inflation, especially with gas and food, which have an acute impact on the profits of a fishing trip. 

But no issue has swayed the politics of the fishing industry more than offshore wind development. 

Offshore wind

Since Trump was last in office, offshore wind has become a reality. Vineyard Wind became one of the first U.S. commercial wind farms to come online this February, with dozens more projects of similar scale in the pipeline for development. The industry is now visible, with large turbine components looming over the New Bedford waterfront and along the ocean corridor fishermen take en route to harvesting grounds.

Russel Isabel, captain of three New Bedford scallop vessels, said he is reminded of why he is voting for Trump each time he passes through the hurricane barrier and sees the turbine components along the waterfront. 

“It’s killing the fishing industry. And at the end of the day, all of the money is going to foreign corporations,” said Isabel, who was recently featured in The Light when a police officer told him to take down his anti-offshore wind flag during a waterfront political ceremony. “Where does the U.S. benefit?” 

Whereas the Trump administration put roadblocks in the path of offshore wind, the Biden-Kamala Harris administration has fast-tracked industry development, arguing that alternative energy sources will bring jobs and fight climate change. Trump also removed the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement during his first term (Biden restored it). Harris has campaigned on the Biden administration’s efforts to build out the nation’s alternative energy sources. She has pledged to continue those efforts through accelerated permitting, tax incentives for developers, and investing in port infrastructure for cities like New Bedford that host offshore wind developers. 

Trump, however, has pledged to rescind unspent funds in Biden’s landmark climate bill. This time, Trump has said, he will not only put the brakes on offshore wind development; he will scrap it altogether.

“We are going to make sure that that ends on day one. … I’m going to write it out in an executive order,” Trump told supporters at a May rally in Wildwood, New Jersey. “They destroy everything; they’re horrible,” he said of wind turbines, claiming they “cause tremendous problems with the fish and the whales.” 

The anti-offshore wind brigade Trump was addressing in New Jersey is mostly concerned with turbines disturbing their scenic vista and diminishing the region’s tourism. And claims of wind power’s effect on whales are hotly disputed and often a subject of misinformation. But the potential impacts on the fishing industry are more severe than the impacts on coastal tourism.

Though Trump’s remarks lack context, federal scientists have sounded the alarm about potential harm development poses to fish spawning habitats that “may result in cascading long-term to permanent effects,” a fisheries administrator wrote to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. 

The prospect of offshore wind encroaching on fishing grounds has made many in the industry one-issue voters. Still, there are shades of gray in this mostly red voting block. 

Some fleet owners, like Alvernaz, have been contracted by developers like Vineyard Wind to use their vessels for supply shipments and crew transfers. Alvarnez says it is ironic. He is a Trump supporter, critical of offshore wind and its impact on the industry. But with the scallop industry in a slump, due to inflation, increased foreign imports and reduced domestic quotas, “wind is the only thing keeping me afloat,” he said. 

Some fishermen say that they are concerned that Trump’s anti-offshore wind rhetoric is only campaign talk. They say they are skeptical he will be able to follow through with his promise of ending offshore wind on “day one.” 

Wes Brighton, captain of a New Bedford scalloper, pointed out that Trump didn’t stop offshore wind in his first term. Trump’s administration actually expanded wind energy leases in waters off the coast of Massachusetts by 390,000 acres in 2018. Those lease areas were sold to three developers, one of which was Vineyard Wind’s second offshore wind lease area in the region. It also expanded offshore wind leases off the coast of North Carolina and Long Island in 2017. 

“I wish we could count on Trump to keep his promise of ending wind on day one, but I think there is too much money in it,” said Brighton, who also sits on the Scallop Advisory Panel. “He just isn’t consistent. You don’t have to look further than how many wind leases were approved by BOEM during [Trump’s] initial term.” 

When it comes to offshore wind, Brighton said, “I don’t think either party has the interests of the fishing industry in mind.” 

Political representation

The fishing industry is an insular political demographic. There are about 40,000 commercial fishermen in the United States, according to federal surveys. There are roughly the same number of fishermen as there are coal miners. Both industries are seething with cultural symbolism, though fishing doesn’t have the same political heft. In the State House in Boston, a wooden effigy of the “sacred cod” hangs from the chamber ceiling. But fishermen say they rarely find any allies there, let alone in the executive branch. 

“Fishing is a small industry,” said Alvernaz. “We need the ear of our politicians. Hopefully with Trump, we can get that. We sure as hell can’t get this [Biden] administration’s ear.” 

Alvernaz said he was a lifelong Democrat until Trump burst into the political arena. He is an immigrant from the Azores, and though he has now ascended to the industry’s ownership class, Alvernaz recalls fondly when New England Democrats like Sen. Ted Kennedy and U.S. Rep. Barney Frank “came down here, got on the boats and fought for the fishermen,” he said. 

“That’s when everybody down here was a Democrat. Where are the politicians like that now?” he said. “The Democrats turned their backs on us. I was a diehard Democrat. I am the furthest thing from that today.” 

Some said Trump differentiated himself from other politicians late in his first term when he hosted a roundtable in Maine with commercial fishermen and the regional fisheries regulatory councils. The meeting was likely to quell frustration that China had imposed tariffs on seafood imports as retaliation for tariffs Trump imposed on China, which took a bite out of domestic seafood prices, especially lobster. However, the fisheries council members present at the meeting asked Trump to overturn the Obama administration’s ban on commercial fishing in the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument. Soon after the meeting, he signed the executive order. 

“He’s the only president in my lifetime that has sat down with fishermen,” said Minkiewicz, of the Sustainable Scalloping Fund. “That means something. The industry felt seen and heard. They don’t feel seen or heard by this current administration. Presumably that would continue under a Harris administration.” 

“We know what the experience was working with the Trump administration. They arranged meetings and took phone calls,” said Bob Vanasse, of Stove Boat Communication, which represents many seafood companies and organizations related to the commercial fishing industry. “That has not been the experience I have had with the Biden administration.” 

Vanasse said the Biden administration’s relationship with the fisheries was demonstrated this month, when BOEM began soliciting proposals to lease 13.4 million acres of ocean in the Central Atlantic. The Port of New Bedford raised “grave concerns” about the proposed lease area, saying it could put up to $2 billion in commercial fishing revenue at risk. 

“The environmental NGOs have had open access to this administration, and I don’t think the commercial fisheries have,” he said. “We know how the Biden-Harris administration handled relations with commercial fishing. What we don’t yet know is whether Kamala Harris as president would diverge from the Biden-Harris administration policies or continue those policies.” 

Science and regulation 

Most fishermen interviewed by The Light said they first voted for Trump in 2016. The reason he first appealed to them is because he wasn’t yet a “politician,” and that he aligned with the anti-government impulse that courses through the fishing industry, due to costly regulations that make a big difference in their income. Fishermen said they were willing to roll the dice. 

As in each election cycle, Trump has once again campaigned on slimming the federal government, which could impact the agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which regulates the fishing industry. The Biden-Harris administration has increased funding for NOAA Fisheries. Through the Inflation Reduction Act, NOAA Fisheries received $1.2 billion under Biden to combat climate change, address the right whale crisis and “modernize” the agency’s research and data collection efforts. About $349 million was earmarked specifically for initiatives related to the commercial fishing industry. 

For some fishermen, there is a sort of vindictive enthusiasm for Trump handicapping an agency that they feel has handicapped their livelihoods.

“NMFS [NOAA Fisheries] is the first one that should be cut,” said Paulo Valente, captain of New Bedford dragger F/V Fisherman. “There are more people working there than there are commercial fishermen. How does that make sense?”

But there is also more grounded skepticism among fishermen when it comes to the government’s approach to stock assessments and science-based regulations. 

Fishermen cited the Northern Edge as an example. This year, fisheries regulators refused to reopen the region of Georges Bank to commercial fishing. The area was closed in 1994 to protect habitat for spawning cod and other bottom-dwelling fisheries. While industry leaders say scallop populations in areas currently open to fishing have reached the end of their cycle, which is reflected in a sharp decline in scallop landings, the Northern Edge is full of large, healthy scallops. However, groundfish populations have continued to decline there despite the closure, while the area has remained locked up to scallopers. 

Fishermen said it demonstrates how regulators have fallen short on two fronts: they have failed to rebuild the groundfish industry, as the closure hasn’t worked, all the while denying access to millions of pounds of scallops.

“It’s incredibly frustrating when people who have never set foot on a boat in their lives have such control over the rules we have to live by,” Brighton said. 

Others say slimming NOAA’s budget will only make the science more flawed, which could actually result in even more restrictive regulations. Eric Hansen, who is a member of the regional regulatory council that advises NOAA and also owns two New Bedford scallop boats, said more science and more funding toward sciences can only help the industry. 

“They have to be more restrictive based on uncertainty,” he said. “Trump has a lot of promises, that’s all I can say. Superficially, it sounds good. But the scallop industry wouldn’t be where it is today without good science and regulation.” 

Article courtesy of Will Sennott and The New Bedford Light. Read more here.